Search results

The purpose of this research is to investigate how different accountability practices might be observed in the annual reports of non-government organisations (NGOs) in Bangladesh. The study further aims to understand whether such accountability disclosures support NGO legitimacy in Bangladesh and if so, in what form.

To fulfil this objective, a content analysis was conducted on the annual reports of 24 selected leading NGOs operating in Bangladesh. The data were then analysed through the not-for-profit accountability framework of Dhanani and Connolly (2012). Theoretical constructs of legitimacy were further mobilised to corroborate the evidence.

It was found that NGOs operating in Bangladesh discharged all four types of accountability, i.e., strategic, fiduciary, financial and procedural (Dhanani and Connolly, 2012) through annual reports. The findings further suggested that carrying out these accountabilities supported the legitimation process of NGOs. Moreover, we found that NGOs took care of the needs of both primary and secondary stakeholders although they widely used self-laudatory positively charged words to disclose information about their accountabilities.

The study contributes to the limited accounting research on the public disclosures of NGOs and not-for-profit firms particularly in emerging economy settings. Also, we contribute to the limited research on the accountability-legitimacy link of NGOs evident in public disclosures like annual reports.

This paper explores how INGOs communicate their activities and achievements. In doing so, the study seeks to increase our understanding of INGOs' accountability practices.

This paper uses thematic analysis to analyse 90 ‘leaders’ letters' (the letters that many charities include at the beginning of their Annual Reports and Accounts), published by 39 INGOs between 2015 and 2018.

This paper argues that within the Annual Report letters under consideration, INGOs' accountability practices focus on quantitative, process-driven, output reporting. In doing so, it is the actions and agency of INGOs that are primarily emphasised. INGO constituents are largely excluded from representation. Donors are presented only as contributors of financial capital. Drawing on field theory, the paper argues that this representational practice means INGO constituents are almost irrelevant to INGOs' representational and accountability communication practices.

This paper is indebted to previous important work and, building on such scholarship, seeks to contribute to the ongoing conversation about INGO accountability. While reinforcing some prior knowledge, the findings here also differ in the understanding of how donors are portrayed. The paper extends previous analyses by using field theory to show that the INGO field as considered here is a space in which representations of accountability are based on organisational and transactional factors, and does not value the humanity of INGOs' constituents. This connects to operations of power, between donors, INGOs, and constituents, and reinforces inequitable power within the development system.

This article examines whether accountability can contribute to the analysis of effectiveness in grassroots voluntary organizations (GVOs) in France.

Based on recent studies and stakeholder theory, hypotheses are formulated about the negative link between accountability and financial effectiveness and a positive link between accountability and non-financial effectiveness.

The findings show that accountability practices are positive determinants of financial indicators (apart from return on assets [ROA]) and employment of people in difficulty. In contrast, the other non-financial indicators are not explained by accountability practices.

The study points out the complexity and paradoxes surrounding accountability and highlights the risk of insensitivity to it. It thus underlines a specific French situation, close to the risks of myopia linked to accountability. One possible explanation could be the coupling and decoupling mechanisms that allow non-profit organizations (NPOs) to regain power. Given the sometimes-random effects of accountability, producing nuanced theories is necessary, and governance should oscillate between equilibrium and adaptation in the face of stakeholders. Finally, this article introduces the risk of insensitivity of NPOs to accountability (i.e. they act as they wish, regardless of control mechanisms such as accountability).

This study thus reveals governance dilemmas, which could be solved through less formal, more mission-oriented, more creative and therefore heterodox accountability.

The French context of mistrust of certain managerial approaches and the development of codes of governance based on a disciplinary vision are confronted with a growing and critical literature on accountability in NPOs.

The purpose of this study is to present an in-depth examination of stakeholder engagement processes in non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from the perspective of NGO managers to enhance accountability and the effectiveness with which aid services are delivered. Specifically, demand-side (downward) accountability and the implications of an accountability system that is predominantly supply-side (upward) focused are explored.

This study draws on evidence gathered from 25 in-depth interviews with representatives of leading NGOs in Nigeria to explore and uncover the nature of stakeholder engagement and accountability processes in their respective organisations. This study shows prospects for entrenching organisational reform that balances power and influence that benefits the less economically powerful demand side of the stakeholders. A relevant aspect of stakeholder theory was used to frame the analysis.

The study reveals an overlay of a blanket engagement system and a seeming reluctance of NGOs to disclose critical information to the demand-side stakeholders (DSS), and suggests ways to meet sustainability demands and address the militating concerns. A perceived lack of understanding and prospects or outcomes of demand-side accountability are central to this; however, engagement outcomes that account for impact rather than output are explored and reported. The findings suggest that proper accountability involves adequate stakeholder engagement which is a prerequisite and paramount for sustainability.

This study primarily delineates NGO managers’ views on NGO engagement and accountability dynamics. Future research may explore the perspectives of downward stakeholders themselves. The study highlights the concern for NGOs to maintain a defined stakeholder engagement process that resists external forces that may impact on their operations and derail their mission, resulting in duplication of services.

The study shows the implications of donors’ influence on accountability practices which can be improved by re-structuring supply-side stakeholders to significantly include DSS accountability requirements in the key performance indicators of NGOs in developing countries. The authors present a nuanced perspective to aid delivery and access that ensures improved services and more effective, impactful and sustainable aid which is of practical relevance to NGOs and their accountability mechanism.

This study deepens the understanding of the dynamics of stakeholder engagement and accountability processes and shows that the most effective way to deploy aid funds to meet sustainability goals is to draw on the experiences and local knowledge of the DSS. This would require an effective and results-driven dialogue among all the stakeholders involved. The proposed engagement and management framework contribute to theory and practice by fostering multi-stakeholder cooperation, DSS accountability and the advancement of sustainable development

Developing economies often lack sufficient state regulation to encourage corporations to engage with environmental sustainability challenges. Environmental NGOs fill this vacuum but this relationship is fraught with challenges, linked to each party’s competing interests. This paper examines how an environmental NGO operating in a developing country manages such challenges.

A longitudinal case study, from 2017–2022, based on semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis, with the main periods of field work in 2017 and 2020.

We unravel nuanced dynamics of accountability within an NGOs collaborative ecosystem. Our findings reveal a web of interlinked obligations and expectations, strategically adopted to reconcile environmental and CSR logics fostering trustworthy partnerships with firms. Despite aiming for transformative change, the NGO made gradual initiatives, to meet the challenges of fostering systemic change in developing nations. Institutional logics of professionalism and development allowed NGO members avoid mission drift and realign upward accountability relations into lateral ones.

The study provides insight into successful NGO-corporate partnerships and illustrates how accountability is negotiated, upheld, and reconceptualized in such collaborations.

This paper aims to extend some of the theoretical propositions of Michael Power’s (1997) audit society thesis by exploring the capacity of organisations to push back against external accountability pressures. The paper positions the literature on non-governmental organisation (NGO) accounting and accountability as a “case study” against which the notion of the audit society is put to the test.

A qualitative meta-synthesis of the accounting literature is used to analyse how NGOs have responded to audit society pressures – most notably funder pressures to adopt formalised accountability mechanisms. The different responses of NGOs to funder accountability demands are analysed using Christine Oliver’s (1991) typology of strategic responses to institutional processes.

This review of the accounting literature unveils that NGOs can adopt a range of strategic responses to funder accountability pressures that vary from passive conformity to proactive manipulation. The findings confirm that NGOs often perceive acquiescence to funder accountability demands as necessary to ensure organisational survival. Yet, the author also found that NGO resistance to funder accountability pressures is more common than previously assumed. Five dominant forms of “accountability resistances” emerged from the analysis: evading accountability, disguising accountability, shielding accountability, negotiating accountability and shaping accountability.

By conducting a qualitative meta-synthesis of the accounting literature, the author was able to integrate the findings of prior research on NGO resistance to funder accountability demands, guide future research and extend Michael Power’s (1997) work by developing a more nuanced understanding of how organisations respond to external accountability pressures.

This study explores the evolving dynamics of participatory accountability within humanitarian contexts, where digitally connected crisis-affected populations demand better accountability from aid organisations, and as a result, shift traditional hierarchies and relationships between humanitarian agencies and beneficiaries.

This study employs a case study approach, focussing on the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to investigate how participatory accountability manifests outside formal practices and re-emerges in social media spaces. The study analyses internal organisational challenges and explores the implications of digital platforms on humanitarian practices. The authors employ Chouliaraki and Georgiou's (2015, 2019, 2022) networks of mediation, particularly intermediation and transmediation, to understand how digital expressions translate to offline contexts and reshape meanings and actions.

The study reveals that social media platforms enable beneficiaries to demand participatory accountability beyond traditional practices, democratising humanitarian response and challenging power structures. These effects are multifaceted, introducing enhanced democratic and inclusive humanitarian aid as well as new vulnerabilities. Digital intermediaries and gatekeepers play pivotal roles in curating and disseminating crisis-affected voices, which, when transmediated, result in nuanced meanings and understandings. Positive effects include capturing the potential of digital networks for democratic aid, while negative effects give rise to moral responsibilities, necessitating proactive measures from the ICRC.

This study contributes to the literature by highlighting the impact of digital technology, particularly social media, on participatory accountability. It expands the understanding of the evolving landscape of accountability within the humanitarian sector and offers critical insights into the complexities and dual purposes of participatory accountability in contexts of resistance. Employing Chouliaraki and Georgiou's networks of mediation adds depth to the understanding of digital technology's role in shaping participatory practices and introduces the concept of transmediation as a bridge between digital expressions and tangible actions.

This paper aims to better understand how accountability for sustainability takes shape within organisations and specifically, what makes employees act in a Swedish local authority. This aim moves beyond the prevalent external face of accountability in social and environmental accounting research by observing how employees understand and act upon their multiple accountability demands.

This paper adopts a single case study approach within a Swedish local authority, drawing from qualitative data including semi-structured interviews, site visits and governing documents.

Sustainable action is not only the product of hierarchically enforced structural accountabilities and procedures but often must be reconciled with the personal perspectives of the public sector employees involved as part of an accountability dynamic. Additionally, the findings reveal that hierarchical accountability, rather than serving to individualise and isolate employees, acts as a prompt for the more practical and personal reconciliations of accountability with the ethics and experiences of the individual involved.

Greater consideration to employee socialisation processes in public sector organisations should be given to reinforce organisational governance systems and controls, and thus help ensure sustainable behaviour in practice.

Employee socialisation processes are important for the development of sustainable practices both within and beyond organisational boundaries.

This study considers the interrelatedness of hierarchical and socialising accountability measures and contributes towards the understanding of the relationship between these two accountability forms, contrary to previous understandings that emphasise their contrasting nature and incompatibility.

This study aims to explore what and how digital innovation, as a knowledge-based and multi-dimensional process, can be used to increase the accountability of public and private sector organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Taking an interpretivist approach, qualitative research is designed around Strong Structuration Theory (SST). A content analysis of relevant documents and semi-structured interviews focusing on the relationships between digital innovation and accountability in extraordinary times is conducted.

The results show the existence of digital innovation barriers and facilitators that can have an impact on accountability during extraordinary times. The research highlights how managers of public organizations focus largely on the social dimension of knowledge (i.e., competencies shaped by collective culture), while managers of private organizations focus mainly on the human dimension of knowledge (i.e., skills gained through learning by doing).

The paper enriches the accountability literature by historicizing SST for extraordinary times and by utilizing a multiple-dimensional approach to digital innovation. Also, the work underlines specific strategies organizations could usefully adopt to improve accountability through digital innovation in the public and private sectors during extraordinary times.

This article emphasizes the crucial integration of technological components with knowledge. In particular, the digital innovation is considered as a strong synergy of human and social dimensions that compels organizations toward enhanced accountability, particularly in the face of extraordinary challenges.

Ethnography produces accounts; the critical reflection of accounts produces accountability. Ethnography requires accountability if meaningful conclusions and/or observations are to be made. Accountability requires ethnography if is to address lived experiences. Virno argues that the principles of “languaging” make ethnographies and accountability possible. This papers aims to describe an instance of the circularity of accountability and use this to explore Virno’s insights. Doing this helps us to see the connections between accountability and ethnography, and reflect on the nature of these interconnections.

Inspired by Paulo Virno’s philosophy, the authors assert that an ethnographer typically produces an account of a chosen “Other” in which this “Other” is held to account. But at the same time, the ethnographer needs to be held to account by the very same “Other” and by the “Other” of the (research) community. Furthermore, ethnographers are accountable to themselves. All these moments of accountability can endlessly circle, as responsibilization of the researchers by their Other(s) continues. For ethnography to function, this must be tamed as a (research) account ultimately has to be produced for an academic project to be considered complete. Drawing on Virno’s principle of the “negation of the negation” by the “katechon,” by the “katechon,” the authors propose a potentially valuable intervention that would enable ethnography – and by extension, ethnographers – to prosper.

The authors apply Virno’s philosophical reflections to propose a positive feedback cycle between ethnography and accountability. Virno’s ideation centers on two key concepts: (i) the multitude of social relatedness and (ii) the ontology of the languaging of individuation. Hereby, a positive circle of causality between ethnography and accountability can be realized, whereby the authors can respect but also break the causal circle(s) of ethnography and accountability. This might be achieved via a reflection on Virno’s concept of the “katechon.”

The authors illuminate the accountability–ethnography dynamic, providing an illustration of the circularity of ethnography and accountability and showing how Virno provides us with tools to help us deal with it. Hence, ultimately, the paper focuses on the accountability as ethnographers.